scholarly journals Demographic and occupational determinants of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG seropositivity in hospital staff

Author(s):  
Christopher A Martin ◽  
Prashanth Patel ◽  
Charles Goss ◽  
David R Jenkins ◽  
Arthur Price ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Although evidence suggests that demographic characteristics including minority ethnicity increase the risk of infection with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), it is unclear whether these characteristics, together with occupational factors, influence anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG seroprevalence in hospital staff. Methods We conducted cross-sectional surveillance examining seroprevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG amongst staff at University Hospitals of Leicester (UHL) NHS Trust. We quantified seroprevalence stratified by ethnicity, occupation and seniority of practitioner and used logistic regression to examine demographic and occupational factors associated with seropositivity. Results A total of 1148/10662 (10.8%) hospital staff members were seropositive. Compared to White staff (seroprevalence 9.1%), seroprevalence was higher in South Asian (12.3%) and Black (21.2%) staff. The occupations and department with the highest seroprevalence were nurses/healthcare assistants (13.7%) and the Emergency Department (ED)/Acute Medicine (17.5%), respectively. Seroprevalence decreased with seniority in medical/nursing practitioners. Minority ethnicity was associated with seropositivity on an adjusted analysis (South Asian: aOR 1.26; 95%CI: 1.07–1.49 and Black: 2.42; 1.90–3.09). Anaesthetics/ICU staff members were less likely to be seropositive than ED/Acute medicine staff (0.41; 0.27–0.61). Conclusions Ethnicity and occupational factors, including specialty and seniority, are associated with seropositivity for anti-SARS-Cov-2 IgG. These findings could be used to inform occupational risk assessments for front-line healthcare workers.

Thorax ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 75 (12) ◽  
pp. 1089-1094 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adrian Shields ◽  
Sian E Faustini ◽  
Marisol Perez-Toledo ◽  
Sian Jossi ◽  
Erin Aldera ◽  
...  

ObjectiveTo determine the rates of asymptomatic viral carriage and seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in healthcare workers.DesignA cross-sectional study of asymptomatic healthcare workers undertaken on 24/25 April 2020.SettingUniversity Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust (UHBFT), UK.Participants545 asymptomatic healthcare workers were recruited while at work. Participants were invited to participate via the UHBFT social media. Exclusion criteria included current symptoms consistent with COVID-19. No potential participants were excluded.InterventionParticipants volunteered a nasopharyngeal swab and a venous blood sample that were tested for SARS-CoV-2 RNA and anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein antibodies, respectively. Results were interpreted in the context of prior illnesses and the hospital departments in which participants worked.Main outcome measureProportion of participants demonstrating infection and positive SARS-CoV-2 serology.ResultsThe point prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 viral carriage was 2.4% (n=13/545). The overall seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was 24.4% (n=126/516). Participants who reported prior symptomatic illness had higher seroprevalence (37.5% vs 17.1%, χ2=21.1034, p<0.0001) and quantitatively greater antibody responses than those who had remained asymptomatic. Seroprevalence was greatest among those working in housekeeping (34.5%), acute medicine (33.3%) and general internal medicine (30.3%), with lower rates observed in participants working in intensive care (14.8%). BAME (Black, Asian and minority ethnic) ethnicity was associated with a significantly increased risk of seropositivity (OR: 1.92, 95% CI 1.14 to 3.23, p=0.01). Working on the intensive care unit was associated with a significantly lower risk of seropositivity compared with working in other areas of the hospital (OR: 0.28, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.78, p=0.02).Conclusions and relevanceWe identify differences in the occupational risk of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 between hospital departments and confirm asymptomatic seroconversion occurs in healthcare workers. Further investigation of these observations is required to inform future infection control and occupational health practices.


Author(s):  
Adrianna Bella ◽  
Mochamad Thoriq Akbar ◽  
Gita Kusnadi ◽  
Olivia Herlinda ◽  
Putri Aprilia Regita ◽  
...  

(1) Background: because of close contacts with COVID-19 patients, hospital workers are among the highest risk groups for infection. This study examined the socioeconomic and behavioral correlates of COVID-19 infection among hospital workers in Indonesia, the country hardest-hit by the disease in the Southeast Asia region. (2) Methods: we conducted a cross-sectional study, which collected data from 1397 hospital staff from eight hospitals in the Greater Jakarta area during April–July 2020. The data was collected using an online self-administered questionnaire and Reverse Transcription-Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) tests. We employed descriptive statistics and adjusted and unadjusted logistic regressions to analyze the data of hospital workers as well as the subgroups of healthcare and non-healthcare workers. (3) Results: from a total of 1397 hospital staff in the study, 22 (1.6%) were infected. In terms of correlates, being a healthcare worker (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 8.31, 95% CI 1.27–54.54) and having a household size of more than five (AOR = 4.09, 1.02–16.43) were significantly associated with a higher risk of infection. On the other hand, those with middle- and upper-expenditure levels were shown to have a lower risk of infection (AOR = 0.06, 0.01–0.66). Behavioral factors associated with COVID-19 infection among healthcare and non-healthcare workers included knowledge of standard personal protective equipment (PPE) (AOR = 0.08, 0.01–0.54) and application of the six-step handwashing technique (AOR = 0.32, 0.12–0.83). (4) Conclusion: among hospital staff, correlates of COVID-19 infection included being a healthcare worker, household size, expenditure level, knowledge and use of PPE, and application of appropriate hand washing techniques.


2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (A) ◽  
pp. 651-658
Author(s):  
Mona Mohiedden ◽  
Aml M. Said ◽  
Ahmed M. Ali ◽  
Mohammed M. Abdel Razik ◽  
Maha Ali Gad

BACKGROUND: Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at the frontline defense against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. AIM: The study aimed to describe the characteristics and appraise potential risk factors of COVID-19 transmission among HCWs who tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) in one of Cairo University Hospitals. METHOD: Cross-sectional descriptive analysis of confirmed polymerase chain reaction (PCR) positive versus negative cases for COVID-19. RESULTS: Through March–June 2020, (145/846; 17%) suspected HCWs were tested for COVID-19 by PCR; out of them (70/145; 48.3%) were confirmed as positive, these positive cases represented (70/846; 8.3%) of all HCWs of the hospital. About 33% of confirmed COVID-19 positive HCWs acquired the infection from the healthcare while only (13/70; 19%) from community settings, and no clear exposure data were identified in (34/70; 48%) of cases. Most of symptomatic cases showed a positive PCR test for SARS-CoV-2 versus asymptomatic cases, p < 0.001. There was no statistical significance regarding gender, age, presence of comorbidity, workload or the type of acquisition. CONCLUSION: HCWs are at an increased risk of COVID-19 infection at the workplace. Strict implementation of infection control measures is of crucial role in preventing transmission of COVID-19 infection in health-care settings.


2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (17) ◽  
pp. 6855 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juan Gómez-Salgado ◽  
Sara Domínguez-Salas ◽  
Macarena Romero-Martín ◽  
Mónica Ortega-Moreno ◽  
Juan Jesús García-Iglesias ◽  
...  

The health crisis triggered by COVID-19 and the preventive measures taken to control it have caused a strong psychological impact on the population, especially on healthcare professionals. Risk exposure, uncertainty about how to approach the disease, care and emotional overburden, lack of resources, or unclear ever-changing protocols are, among others, psychological distress risk factors for the healthcare professionals who have faced this dramatic scenario on the front line. On the other hand, the Sense of Coherence (SOC) is a competence that could help these professionals perceive the situation as understandable, manageable, and meaningful, facilitating the activation of their resilience. This work aims to describe the levels of psychological distress and SOC of healthcare professionals during the crisis caused by COVID-19, the relationship between both variables, and their health status. A cross-sectional descriptive study with a sample of 1459 currently active healthcare workers was developed. GHQ-12 and SOC-13 were used for data collection. Bivariate analyses were performed, including Chi-Squared Test, Student’s T-Test, Analysis of Variance—ANOVA (with Bonferroni test for multiple comparisons), and correlations. Cohen’s d or Cramer’s V effect size measurements were also provided. The results showed that 80.6% of healthcare professionals had psychological distress, and the mean score on the SOC-13 scale was 62.8 points (SD = 12.02). Both psychological distress and SOC were related to the presence of COVID-19 symptoms, as well as with contact history. Professionals with psychological distress showed a lower SOC. Taking care of the mental health of healthcare professionals is essential to effectively cope with the COVID-19 pandemic. Given the psychological impact of working in the current menacing scenario, people on the front line against the disease should be protected, minimizing risks, providing them with resources and support, and fostering their coping skills.


2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nader Salari ◽  
Habibolah Khazaie ◽  
Amin Hosseinian-Far ◽  
Behnam Khaledi-Paveh ◽  
Mohsen Kazeminia ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Stress, anxiety, and depression are some of the most important research and practice challenges for psychologists, psychiatrists, and behavioral scientists. Due to the importance of issue and the lack of general statistics on these disorders among the Hospital staff treating the COVID-19 patients, this study aims to systematically review and determine the prevalence of stress, anxiety and depression within front-line healthcare workers caring for COVID-19 patients. Methods In this research work, the systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression approaches are used to approximate the prevalence of stress, anxiety and depression within front-line healthcare workers caring for COVID-19 patients. The keywords of prevalence, anxiety, stress, depression, psychopathy, mental illness, mental disorder, doctor, physician, nurse, hospital staff, 2019-nCoV, COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2 and Coronaviruses were used for searching the SID, MagIran, IranMedex, IranDoc, ScienceDirect, Embase, Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science (ISI) and Google Scholar databases. The search process was conducted in December 2019 to June 2020. In order to amalgamate and analyze the reported results within the collected studies, the random effects model is used. The heterogeneity of the studies is assessed using the I2 index. Lastly, the data analysis is performed within the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software. Results Of the 29 studies with a total sample size of 22,380, 21 papers have reported the prevalence of depression, 23 have reported the prevalence of anxiety, and 9 studies have reported the prevalence of stress. The prevalence of depression is 24.3% (18% CI 18.2–31.6%), the prevalence of anxiety is 25.8% (95% CI 20.5–31.9%), and the prevalence of stress is 45% (95% CI 24.3–67.5%) among the hospitals’ Hospital staff caring for the COVID-19 patients. According to the results of meta-regression analysis, with increasing the sample size, the prevalence of depression and anxiety decreased, and this was statistically significant (P < 0.05), however, the prevalence of stress increased with increasing the sample size, yet this was not statistically significant (P = 0.829). Conclusion The results of this study clearly demonstrate that the prevalence of stress, anxiety and depression within front-line healthcare workers caring for COVID-19 patients is high. Therefore, the health policy-makers should take measures to control and prevent mental disorders in the Hospital staff.


BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. e025071 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liana Carmen Nagy ◽  
Muhammad Faisal ◽  
Maria Horne ◽  
Paul Collings ◽  
Sally Barber ◽  
...  

ObjectivesTo investigate factors associated with movement behaviours among White British (WB) and South Asian (SA) children aged 6–8 years during school terms and holidays.DesignCross-sectional.SettingThree primary schools from the Bradford area, UK.ParticipantsOne hundred and sixty WB and SA children aged 6–8 years.Primary and secondary outcomesSedentary behaviour (SB), light physical activity (LPA) and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) measured by accelerometry during summer, winter and spring and during school terms and school holidays. Data were analysed using multivariate mixed-effects multilevel modelling with robust SEs. Factors of interest were ethnicity, holiday/term, sex, socioeconomic status (SES), weight status, weekend/weekday and season.ResultsOne hundred and eight children (67.5%) provided 1157 valid days of data. Fifty-nine per cent of children were WB (n=64) and 41% (n=44) were SA. Boys spent more time in MVPA (11 min/day, p=0.013) compared with girls and SA children spent more time in SB (39 min, p=0.017) compared with WB children in adjusted models. Children living in higher SES areas were more sedentary (43 min, p=0.006) than children living in low SES areas. Children were more active during summer (15 min MVPA, p<0.001; 27 LPA, p<0.001) and spring (15 min MVPA, p=0.005; 38 min LPA, p<0.001) and less sedentary (−42 min and −53 min, p<0.001) compared with winter. Less time (8 min, p=0.012) was spent in LPA during school terms compared with school holidays. Children spent more time in MVPA (5 min, p=0.036) during weekend compared with weekdays. Overweight and obese children spent more time in LPA (21 min, p=0.021) than normal-weight children.ConclusionThe results of our study suggest that significant child level factors associated with movement behaviours are ethnicity, sex, weight-status and area SES. Significant temporal factors are weekends, school holidays and seasonality. Interventions to support health enhancing movement behaviours may need to be tailored around these factors.


BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (10) ◽  
pp. e042752 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tsion Firew ◽  
Ellen D Sano ◽  
Jonathan W Lee ◽  
Stefan Flores ◽  
Kendrick Lang ◽  
...  

ObjectiveThe COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with significant occupational stressors and challenges for front-line healthcare workers (HCWs), including COVID-19 exposure risk. Our study sought to assess factors contributing to HCW infection and psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic in the USA.DesignWe conducted a cross sectional survey of HCWs (physicians, nurses, emergency medical technicians (EMTs), non-clinical staff) during May 2020. Participants completed a 42-item survey assessing disease transmission risk (clinical role, work environment, availability of personal protective equipment) and mental health (anxiety, depression and burn-out).SettingThe questionnaire was disseminated over various social media platforms. 3083 respondents from 48 states, the District of Columbia and US territories accessed the survey.ParticipantsUsing a convenience sample of HCWs who worked during the pandemic, 3083 respondents accessed the survey and 2040 participants completed at least 80% of the survey.Primary outcomePrevalence of self-reported COVID-19 infection, in addition to burn-out, depression and anxiety symptoms.ResultsParticipants were largely from the Northeast and Southern USA, with attending physicians (31.12%), nurses (26.80%), EMTs (13.04%) with emergency medicine department (38.30%) being the most common department and specialty represented. Twenty-nine per cent of respondents met the criteria for being a probable case due to reported COVID-19 symptoms or a positive test. HCWs in the emergency department (31.64%) were more likely to contract COVID-19 compared with HCWs in the ICU (23.17%) and inpatient settings (25.53%). HCWs that contracted COVID-19 also reported higher levels of depressive symptoms (mean diff.=0.31; 95% CI 0.16 to 0.47), anxiety symptoms (mean diff.=0.34; 95% CI 0.17 to 0.52) and burn-out (mean diff.=0.54; 95% CI 0.36 to 0.71).ConclusionHCWs have experienced significant physical and psychological risk while working during the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings highlight the urgent need for increased support for provider physical and mental health well-being.


2011 ◽  
Vol 32 (10) ◽  
pp. 1010-1015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olivier le Polain de Waroux ◽  
Sandra Cohuet ◽  
Louise Bishop ◽  
Sandra Johnson ◽  
Karen Shaw ◽  
...  

Background.Alexander Litvinenko died on November 23, 2006, from acute radiation sickness syndrome caused by ingestion of polonium-210 (210Po).Objective.The objective was to assess the prevalence of and risk factors for internal contamination with 210Po in healthcare workers (HCWs) caring for the contaminated patient.Setting.Hospital.Participants.HCWs who had direct contact with the patient.Methods.We interviewed 43 HCWs and enquired about their activities and use of personal protective equipment (PPE). Internal contamination was denned as urinary 210Po excretion above 20 mBq within 24 hours. We obtained risk ratios (RRs) for internal contamination using Poisson regression.Results.Thirty-seven HCWs (86%) responded, and 8 (22%) showed evidence of internal contamination, all at very low levels that were unlikely to cause adverse health outcomes. Daily care of the patient (washing and toileting the patient) was the main risk factor (RR, 3.6 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.1-11.6]). In contrast, planned invasive procedures were not associated with a higher risk. There was some evidence of a higher risk associated with handling blood samples (RR, 3.5 [95% CI, 0.8-15.6]) and changing urine bags and/or collecting urine samples (RR, 2.7 [95% CI, 0.8-9.5]). There was also some evidence that those who reported not always using standard PPE were at higher risk than were others (RR, 2.5 [95% CI, 0.8-8.1]).Conclusions.The sensitive quantitative measurement enabled us to identify factors associated with contamination, which by analogy to other conditions with similar transmission mechanisms may help improve protection and preparedness in staff dealing with an ill patient who experiences an unknown illness.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document